The Sheehan Family

Our family has been so distressed by the recent activities of Cindy we are breaking our silence and we have collectively written a statement for release. Feel free to distribute it as you wish.

Thanks, Cherie

In response to questions regarding the Cindy Sheehan/Crawford Texas issue: Sheehan Family Statement:

The Sheehan Family lost our beloved Casey in the Iraq War and we have been silently, respectfully grieving. We do not agree with the political motivations and publicity tactics of Cindy Sheehan. She now appears to be promoting her own personal agenda and notoriety at the the expense of her son's good name and reputation. The rest of the Sheehan Family supports the troops, our country, and our President, silently, with prayer and respect.

Sincerely, Casey Sheehan's grandparents, aunts, uncles and numerous cousins.

via Drudge

Comments

[TheAlamo]

Well, nice dissertation Cindi, as usual. Void, but at least an attempt was made.

I will answer your questions in inverse order. The Alamo was surrounded by approximately 7000 Mexican soldiers in 1836. There were 182 various freedom fighters in the Alamo at the time (many of which were Mexican BTW--a fact that has been conveniently left out of modern revisionist history--but, I digress). The Mexican army attacked frontally on two separate occaisions but were thwarted. On the third attempt, they attacked all sides at the same time and vanquished the heroes. Among the well known dead were William B. Travis, Davey Crockett and Jim Bowie. Seems these men did not take kindly to government running their lives as they were quite capable to do so themselves. Later at the battle of San Jacinto, the Texas "rebels" soundly defeated the Mexican army and Texas became a republic--NOT a democracy. (BTW Cindi you should learn the difference between a republic and a democracy--not knowing could kill you) You see Cindi, you pick one little area to argue hoping you can show a semblence of intelligence. You conveniently leave out the whole story. It is like making fun of Pearl Harbor. Who won that battle Cindi? You want to make fun of it as well?

Now to closing our borders is NOT an option. Okay why? I live down here and I see them all over the place. They get free medical and dental--on YOUR nickle. They rob homes, rape and commit various crimes--and YOU pay for it. To maintain our way of life closing our borders to illegals is an OBLIGATION, and you are right, there should be no "options" about it. California has already made Spanish the official state language. But the illegals are harmless. You HAVE to teach bilingual down here--but the illegals are harmless. Again, you make a statement with absolutely nothing to back it but MSM rhetoric. Not one iota of reason WHY it is good for America. Because you can't.
Now, how about the other issues? Did you conveniently "forget" them?
So far you are 0 for 1. Let me hear why it is so good for America that our property can be confiscated at whim. I REALLY want to see your patriotism here Cindi. Please enlighten me.
And....why do you support government officials breaking the law? Are you a criminal as well? Or do you just get in step like they tell you because it is TOO hard to go against your "group?" Go ahead enlighten me. Tell me how it is good for America that your president and most of congress just ignore the law. Make me feel good about America Cindi...show me how that is good for me and my family and their future. I wait..........

[Religion Bad]

You are the one advocating a religious war.

[Cindy is]

Daring to speak out so publicly against the imperial presidency of George Bush is a dangerous thing in this country. One risks having one's name smeared through the mud by George's propaganda henchmen (e.g. Mike Savage, O'Reilly, Limbaugh) and having the FBI or CIA investigate you, not to mention other repercussions.

This woman is risking all to speak the truth.

This is what a true patriot is all about.

CINDY SHEEHAN IS THE TRUE AMERICAN PATRIOT.

[!]

Cindi Sheehan is one big joke now ! She has allowed herself to be sucked up by Michael Moore and the likes of him to carry on their agenda. Do you really really think he and others like him care about her ? Hell no !! They are using her just like they use anyone and anything they can. They are a desperate bunch of haters, slanderers and liars. These are the disgusting kinds of people these days that are bringing our country down. They work so very hard to turn one another against each other and they work so very hard to twist and turn anything they can to make one look bad.

Has there ever in the history of this country been a President that was perfect and a President that people on whatever side did not bash and trash for one thing or another ?? Hell no ! You know it and I know it.

This country has become infested with a bunch of wine bags and spoiled brats. Dammed if you do and dammed if you don't. None of you whiners and brats are any better than anyone else. We are all created equal ! Instead of trying to get along and supporting the leader of this great country you try to bring him down ? For what ??..because you may not agree with him and his advisors ? How childish is that.

GROW UP AND SHUT THE HELL UP. YOUR BULLCRAP IS GETTING VERY OLD NOW. !

[Texas Joe]

OK get this straight.
I never claimed that Cindy does not have the right to freely assemble, express her views, protest or whatever. But I am amazed at the nerve of this woman demanding to meet with the President.

No I don't think the president or politicians are a class unto themselves but I think that his job does demand a lot of work and time. I'm not sure of exactly how he spends his workday but I do know:
1 He is is commander and chief of a nation at war and must meet with
the national security officials often and help review the military options in Iraq and Afghanistan.
2 We are still fighting a war on Terrorism and specifically Al Queda, so he is informed daily of intelligence on terrorists.
3 He is responsible for the administration of International Diplomacy and is constantly on the phone with other world leaders
4 He hosts foreign dignitaries and leaders from around the globe when the visit Washington.
5 He must travel to foreign capitals and participate in major international meetings like the G8 summit.
I'm sure I have hinted at only a tiny bit of the responsibilities he has.

His job is to meet all of these responsibilitiies on behalf of all of us, not to meet with each individual disgruntled opponent; even those who have
unfortunately lost loved ones in this conflict.

Now I know a lot of you feel she has the right to demand a face to face meeting with the president but think of this in practical terms. If Bush met privately with her wouldn't it be fair that he meet privately with every family of a fallen soldier in this conflict.
I wonder how much time that would take out of his busy schedule if he met them all in the next year.

Well let me get my pocket calculator out
We have lost about 1500 service men and women so if he met with each family for say 30 minutes it would take

1500 * 30 = 45,000 minutes
there are 60 min in an hour so
45,000min/60 = 750 hours
most people work 40 hours per week so
750 hrs/40= 18.75 weeks

lets see 52 weeks in a year so that means he would spend a lot of his time in
the next year meeting grieving families

18.75 wks/52 = 0.36 or 36 percent

SO what you are proposing is that the president spend one-third of the next year meeting individually with grieving families.

How productive is that?
Is that part of his job description.
What wont get done if he spends a third of a year on this project. Maybe he will miss something important like reacting to the Iranian nuclear crisis, the ongoing tension in the Korean peninsula or the next 911 that Al Queda is planning!
Is that what you want?

[Cindi in PA]

. Make me feel good about America Cindi...show me how that is good for me and my family and their future. I wait..........

Posted by: TheAlamo | August 13, 2005 03:35 PM

Alamo, the mexicans you speak of, I have two nephews that are half mexican, they live in Rio Medina, TX. Their mother (my sister) was active duty in the first Gulf war as well as their father ,Airborne Ranger.

You are showing your true colors, I could give a damn about how your family will survive, that is for you to figure out.

No law has been broken in this country. We were attacked, have you listened to any of the 9/11 tapes, or was that day, just another every day event for you?
I do not support the taking of anyones land, that was inacted by the moderat court. Not something you can blame on President George Bush. If this is truly an issue with you, I suggest you contact your senator. However I doubt that will help you in any way. Seems you are asking, just what is this country going to do for you.

Strange, you can support the Alamo, however with a real war at hand, you choose to hide out, and simply bitch your life away.

And remember this, leave no child behind was passed with you in mind.

[Cindi in PA]

You are the one advocating a religious war.

Posted by: Religion Bad | August 13, 2005 03:40 PM

Are all of your lights on?

Nothing I said supports a religious war........these are just the facts.......mam..

[TheAlamo]

Beth? I presume?

"Cindi Sheehan is one big joke now ! She has allowed herself to be sucked up by Michael Moore and the likes of him to carry on their agenda. Do you really really think he and others like him care about her ? Hell no !! They are using her just like they use anyone and anything they can."

Very mature statment by you.
AND YOU, OF COURSE, ARE NOT BEING USED!

Michael Moore is just as far off base as is Bushlander and the fascists that support him. Like I said, communism on the left, or fascism on the right--pick your poison.

You again....
"This country has become infested with a bunch of wine bags and spoiled brats. Dammed if you do and dammed if you don't. None of you whiners and brats are any better than anyone else. We are all created equal !"

Actually YOU are giving a fine example of whiners and spoiled brat behavior right here. Also WHERE did you get the ludicrous idea that we are all equal? YOU try running for president and see what chance you have. What a joke. We SHOULD be equal under the protection of the law, but to legislate economic equality for one group at the expense of another is NOT equality--it is theft, handily practiced regularly by BOTH the republicans and democrats. Hell there hasn't been equality in this nation since that clown Roosevelt started this socialist nightmare.

And here....you really show your ignorance.....
YOU...
"Instead of trying to get along and supporting the leader of this great country you try to bring him down ? For what ??..because you may not agree with him and his advisors ? How childish is that."

You see, no name, or Beth, this country was founded by people who knew that this was EXACTLY the purpose of a free people. To point out the errors of those who abuse their position in government. That was one of the express reasons for the 1st amendment. WE aren't bringing Bush down...HE is.
This idea that you have, that any government official is somehow "royalty" puts you squarely in the hands of a fascist system. They are NOT better than you. They are NOT ordained by God for the purpose of RULING you.
That's your job. You are, in fact, supposed to govern THEM! How sad you know nothing of the history of your own nation, expecially the founders which provided for your freedom to speak as you wish, but you of course want others to shut up. How interesting.
In case you don't know it....and it is obvious that you do not, the most important person in this country is YOU--the American citizen--when YOU do your job and hold the leaders in check. To blindly follow them, no matter what they do is NOT patriotism, it is, in fact the exact opposite. It shows that you are not willing to do your part in governance of this nation which is your OBLIGATION and right.
When they break the law--they become criminals--just as if you or I did.
When they support illegal aliens entering into this country they should be impeached...period. You see ILLEGAL Alien means ILLEGAL. Get it...ILLEGAL means against the law. I could go on, but what is the use, you will just continue to goose step yourself right into a totalitarian system---and then have the audacity to blame somebody else.

[TheAlamo]

Well, well, well....there is Cindi,

Let's see, you have relatives that are Mexican? So? They served in the war. So? I presume they are Americans, not Mexicans, so what is your issue here, are you a racist?

And...this is so telling....
"You are showing your true colors, I could give a damn about how your family will survive, that is for you to figure out."
I am quite aware of that, you have proven that you will blindly follow the leader right into the pit....and whoever gets smashed along the way tough shit. Yeah, you definitely ARE of the fascist modality. How is your Zieg Heil salute?

"No law has been broken in this country. We were attacked, have you listened to any of the 9/11 tapes, or was that day, just another every day event for you?"
Really? No law has been broken? Hmmm maybe you have a different Constitution than we do. You see mine says that CONGRESS shall DECLARE war before entering into conflict. There are so many breaches of that document by this and past government officials that a whole volume could be written. But you of course actually believe that the federal government has the RIGHT to RULE YOU. How sad, and how diametrically opposed to the founding of this nation. You will do well in the coming state.

Hey....you got one right in the next part! Congratulations!
I do not support the taking of anyones land, that was inacted by the moderat court. Not something you can blame on President George Bush. If this is truly an issue with you, I suggest you contact your senator. However I doubt that will help you in any way. Seems you are asking, just what is this country going to do for you.

You are right, Bushlander did not do that one, the "conservative" supreme court is once again legislating---not provided for in our Constitution.
As for me asking what this country can do for me...not at all. I am prefectly capable of taking care of myself without their help. But I AM tired of them stealing my money and giving it to somebody else. Nope, I am just doing my job as a citizen. Just because you don't like it will make me lose about .5 seconds of sleep tonight.

And finally you finish with " a real war" at hand. Heck Cindi I thought all wars were real wars. You better tell the dead guys in Vietnam that theirs wasn't a "real war"---cause Cindi didn't declare it so.
Actually the theft of airliners by civilians and the following suicide actions were CRIMES,... NOT declarations of war by any particualr nation. But then, we also have a "war on drugs"---have had for years and years....and you see the results. Now do I think we should let them get away with it? Hell no. Let's get Osama bin Laden, and let's force George Bush senior to explain why he is partners in Carlyle Oil Company with Bin Laden senior. HELL yes, let's to after those responsible. I am all for it!

Cindi, you better take up knitting, this way you won't feel so frustrated, or left behind. Good luck....and...don't let your mom know you have been using her computer!

[!]

TheAlamo....

Who died and made you king ?

Seems like you have all the answers. Should we all bow to you now !! You are clueless...
HAHA. TADA!

[Wake Up America]

I'll quote you.....

"If you believe the war against Jihadistan began, on 11 September 2001, taking into account that Jihadi attacks on Western targets date back to the 1960s, then it will likely continue for decades......the war is an epic struggle between Islam and other religions, especially against Jews and Christians.......the war is a clash of civilizations which likely has centuries of conflict yet ahead."

Which part of that exactly is you not advocating a relgious war? It appears as though Alamo is correct. You resort to ad hominem invective as opposed to actually proving your point. And why did you assume I was a woman?

[!]

GREAT AMERICANS !! THANK YOU !!

The rest of the Sheehan Family supports the troops, our country, and our President, silently, with prayer and respect.

Sincerely, Casey Sheehan's grandparents, aunts, uncles and numerous cousins.

[!]

GOD BLESS OUR PRESIDENTS ! WHOMEVER THEY ARE AND WHATEVER YEAR THEY SERVE AND WHATEVER PARTY THEY ARE. WHO CARES ! THEY ARE OUR PRESIDENTS ! WE AS A COUNTRY SHOUDL RESPECT THEM ALL. BEING PRESIDENT OF THE GREATEST COUNTRY IN THE WORLD IS CERTAINLY NOT AN EASY JOB ! PLEASING ALL THE PEOPLE ALL THE TIME IS NOT AN EASY JOB EITHER !

GOD BLESS OUR TROOPS ALL OVER THE WORLD ! TODAY AND EVERYDAY !!

GOD BLESS AMERICA ! ALWAYS AND FORVER !

PEACE BE TO ALL !!

[TheAlamo]

TheAlamo....

Who died and made you king ?

Seems like you have all the answers. Should we all bow to you now !! You are clueless...
HAHA. TADA!

Posted by: ! | August 13, 2005 09:06 PM

Hmmm, I guess there should be an age limit on this forum. Can't say I blame you for hiding behind the exclamation point. It must be tough to show off your ignorance so blatantly. Your problem with me is, of course, that you know nothing about the whole conversation so you respond like a 2 year old.

I need say no more.....your own statements above are shining examples.....

HAHA TADA?????? Okay. I guess..............

[!]

BORING BORING....YOU LIBERALS ARE SO BORING. Crawl back in the hole from which you came, loser.
NOW... Go ahead and have the last word...haha. Do you really think anyone cares what the hell you say. Enough is enough is enough. See ya!

[!]

GOD BLESS OUR PRESIDENTS ! WHOMEVER THEY ARE AND WHATEVER YEAR THEY SERVE AND WHATEVER PARTY THEY ARE. WHO CARES ! THEY ARE OUR PRESIDENTS ! WE AS A COUNTRY "SHOULD" RESPECT THEM ALL. BEING PRESIDENT OF THE GREATEST COUNTRY IN THE WORLD IS CERTAINLY NOT AN EASY JOB ! PLEASING ALL THE PEOPLE ALL THE TIME IS NOT AN EASY JOB EITHER !

GOD BLESS OUR TROOPS ALL OVER THE WORLD ! TODAY AND EVERYDAY !!

GOD BLESS AMERICA ! ALWAYS AND FORVER !

PEACE BE TO ALL !!

[TheAlamo]

I doubt whether is is the last word. But, if it is, so be it.
I really think it is telling that you cannot function without labels.

Me a liberal? I guess that makes you a conservative since you cannot function without being a part of the greater whole. There IS NOTHING ELSE... RIGHT? One or the other...how sad you are.
Someone who doesn't belong to your "group mindset" just must need to be put in one...whether it fits them or not.

No, I am an American. I am not a follower of a particular group, I am and individual capable of making up my own mind, and do not need to be told what to think...unlike the "groupies."
Sorry....you missed another one.
Hey, keep trying, you might get lucky one day and get one right? I do strongly support your right to do so.
Besides you are truly fun!

[Not a Hand Wringer.]

I think I will write a letter to Matt Drudge claiming to support Cindi, and sign it Casey Sheehans family...

afterall, it's not like Drudge checks the letters to see if any of Sheehan family other than one aunt has anything to do with them.

[!]

http://weshallneverforget.org/hyf/hyf.htm

THIS SINGER TELLS IT LIKE IT IS. NICE LINK. GREAT SONG!

[clintcarter]

Some people just need Structure more than others.

It's getting late. I hope you guys plan on keeping it down in there.

[!]

http://www.griefnet.org/usamemorial/gnmemorial17.html

What a beautiful memorial to all who died on
9-11.

Guess MS.SHEEHAN JUST PLAIN FORGOT.

[!]

http://www.kwanah.com/txmilmus/tnghist3.htm
REMEMBER THE ALAMO
A nice piece of History. :O)

[!]

As the anniversary of 9-11 approaches here are a couple of nice sites and some info on 9-11.

Remember, our troops are ighting for our freedoms. We shoudl never forget. !!

http://www.caldavid.com/911/911.swf

http://www.werismyki.com/

Total Number of 9-11 Victims
as of May 30, 2002
3,056 Persons
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The hijacked jets had struck early enough in the day that the trade center was far from full.The towers had 40,000 employees and 150,000 daily visitors.

The Numbers have risen as high as 6,789 on Sept 24, but have dropped considerably , since duplicates and incorrect listings have been removed from lists of the missing. The number of dead is expected to rise with families obtaining death certificates.

Three months after the World Trade Center attack, victims' families are being forced to face the ghastly possibility that many of the dead were ``vaporized,'' as the medical examiner put it, and may never be identified. The combination of fire and compression from tons of rubble could reduce a human body to a small amount of tissue and bone, said Dr. Cyril Wecht, a top forensic pathologist in Pittsburgh. And finding such small samples of DNA in 1.2 million tons of rubble spread over 16 acres is a difficult proposition..

Many victims will undoubtedly be identified. 753 Bodies and another 15,000 body parts have been pulled from the mountains of mangled metal and matchstick-size splinters at ground zero, leaving many of the victims to be identified by DNA alone.

The city and work crews say the cleanup has gone faster than expected due to longer shifts and a prevailing attitude that victims' families deserve their relentless labor. Workers also credit the speedy progress to a mild winter. The once-daunting job of whittling away at the World Trade Center's ruins was supposed to take a year and run as much as $7 billion, but workers now expect to remove the last of the rubble by summer at a cost estimated to be closer to $1 billion.

1,394,376 tons of World Trade Center debris have been removed from ground zero in 96,433 truckloads. The debris figure represents about 83 percent of the total, with cleanup expected to finish by early June. Streets covered with ash and debris after the Sept. 11 attack have been cleaned and are filled with people, many back at their homes and offices and others coming to see the destruction with their own eyes.

A creed among warriors since Roman centurions were carried home on their shields, it has been redefined since Sept. 11 especially by the New York Fire Department, which has stationed workers at the site around the clock. The department lost 343 members in the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center.

The recent discovery of a lode of remains in the wreckage-filled pit where the south tower once stood has given new hope that most of the firefighters and the 23 city and 37 Port Authority officers lost that day may ultimately be found and identified. This month alone, 3,000 body parts were found.

"We always bring our members out," said Tom Manley, health and safety officer for the firefighters union. "Talk to anyone, from the chiefs to the probies (probationary firefighters) and they all say the same thing, You bring everybody home. ... And that includes all the civilians."

Nearly 500 foreigners from countries all over the world were killed in the World Trade Center attack, accounting for one in six of the victims, according to the most complete city tally yet. The Actual number was 494 which came from 91 countries and accounted for more than 17 percent of those killed.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

New York City: 2,823 Victims
150 Still Missing (not found & no claims)
1102 Identified and Confirmed Dead
1,571 Death Certificates Issued with no remains

New York Firefighters - 343 192 Have been found
151 Are Still Missing

New York Police Officers - 23 14 Have been Found
9 Are Still Missing

Port Authority Officers Lost - 37

Port Authority Dogs Lost - 1
20 Have been Found
17 Are Still Missing

1 Has been Found

3 EMT's Have been Found

American Airlines Flight 11, flying from Boston, Massachusetts to Los Angeles, California, had 81 passengers, nine crew members and two pilots aboard. The Boeing 767 crashed into the 1 World Trade Center in New York City.

United Airlines Flight 175, from Boston to Los Angeles, contained 56 passengers, seven crew members and two pilots. This plane crashed into the 2 World Trade Center tower.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Washington D.C.: 189 believed Dead
Pentagon - 125 Lost

American Airlines Flight 77, flying from Dulles Airport outside Washington, D.C., to Los Angeles, had 58 passengers, four crew members and two pilots, it crashed into the Pentagon.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Pennsylvania 44 Dead in Plane Crash

United Airlines Flight 93, flying from Newark, New Jersey, to San Francisco, California, crashed near Shanksville, Pennsylvania, about 80 miles southeast of Pittsburgh. The plane, also a Boeing 757, held 37 passengers, five crew members and two pilots.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

At the World Trade Center fire, 343 firefighters, many of them among the first to arrive at the scene, were reported missing following the collapses at the site. and are now believed to be dead. It's now estimated that 130 of the 343 firefighters bodies have been found, mainly in pockets of the rubble at or below the surface.

The city's five rescue companies Lost All of the firefighters who responded to the attacks; they account for 75 firefighters either declared dead or missing and The Special Operations Command lost 95 of its 452 firefighters and fire officers. The department also must replace 89 destroyed vehicles, including 18 fire engines, 13 ladder trucks, and five rescue unit trucks,

The rebuilding began almost immediately. In a somber ceremony days after the terrorist attacks, 168 firefighters were promoted to help fill holes in the command structure.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

New York City Reports 71 Officers Missing or Dead

37 Port Authority and New Jersey Police Officers.
23 New York Police Officers
5 Officers - New York Office of Tax Enforcement
3 Officers - New York Office of Court Admin.
1 Officer - Federal Bureau of Investigation
1 Officer - United States Secret Service
1 Officer - Dept of Interior, Fish & Wildlife

[TheAlamo]

And your point is..........?

[!]

http://www.jontzen.com/tribute.htm

THIS LINK IS EXCEPTIONAL.

REMEMBER 9-11

IT HAS SO MANY SONGS AND LINKS.

[P in S.E. Asia]

!

A more pertainent scribing would be a DIRECT LINK b/w 9/11 n Iraq. Im sure many of us onlookers woudl appreciate that.

I can give u a better and more direct link to Saudi Arabia... wonder why they were not attacked. Especially since u said the troops are fighting for your freedoms.

Here in South East Asia, Shorty (Kim in N Korea) poses a greater n more direct threat to his neighbours n the US... Why wasn't he attacked instead?

Go take some tme to have a private discussion with the wise George Dubbya b4 u come here n spew ur unrelated FACTS.

[clintcarter]

Alamo I think this woman is trying to say that because We got hurt the country should be out There hurting Others so they (that would be them) know to leave us alone, you see?

She needs that to feel safe, OK?

I believe you can be very effective stating your case without being dragged into any pissing contests. Aim for dialogue, but know when you/ve missed is my suggestion I guess.

[TheAlamo]

Clint:
Interestingly, I came to that same conclusion, which is why I did not elaborate on her final posts. I appreciate the feedback...and you are quite right.

[!]

I am glad we are in Iraq!! I am sorry our soldiers have to die for our freedoms. Its sad. Without the dedication of our troops we wouid not be free today. We have fought many wars over the years for the freedoms we have today. Iraq and the war on terror want be the last!!
God Bless America...God Bless our President and God bless our troops all over the world, today and everyday !!

Douglas J. Feith, United States undersecretary of defense for policy, stated the following in an interview at the Council on Foreign Relations on February 17, 2005 :

"What the United States had been doing in the world, I think, is right; is justified by well-established principles of international order and law. We have the right to defend ourselves, and that right is inherent in every country. I think that the -- what I was trying to suggest in my talk is that the principles that are the rules of the road are principles that have grown over the centuries, and they adapt. And it is one of the great challenges to the world to figure out what are the proper responses to particular kinds of dangers. And I think that the threat of weapons of mass destruction in the hands of countries that have irresponsible government, governments with records of aggression, with records of violation of their international obligations, with records of tyrannical rule at home, and various other serious problems--that represents a major challenge to the world."

Richard Cheney, United States Vice President, stated in an interview on NBC's Meet the Press on March 16, 2004 :
"I think the United Nations up until now has proven incapable of dealing with the threat that Saddam Hussein represents, incapable of enforcing its own resolutions, incapable of meeting the challenge we face in the 21st century of rogue states armed with deadly weapons, possibly sharing them was terrorists."

"After we got hit on 9/11 the president said no more and enunciated the Bush doctrine that we will hold states that sponsor terror, that provide sanctuary for terrorists to account, that they will be treated as guilty as the terrorists themselves of whatever acts are committed from bases on that soil. That’s a brand- new departure. We’ve never done that before. It makes some people very uncomfortable, but it’s absolutely essential as part of our strategy for taking down the al-Qaeda organization and for ending the terrorist threat that the United States has been forced to deal with over the years. So the notion that the president is a cowboy—I don’t know, is a Westerner, I think that’s not necessarily a bad idea. I think the fact of the matter is he cuts to the chase. He is very direct and I find that very refreshing."

Michael J. Glennon, Professor of International Law at Tufts University, stated the following in his article "Why the Security Council Failed", published in the May/June 2003 issue of Foreign Affairs :

"As surely as Resolution 1441 represented a triumph of American diplomacy, it represented a defeat for the international rule of law. Once the measure was passed after eight weeks of debate, the French, Chinese, and Russian diplomats left the council chamber claiming that they had not authorized the United States to strike Iraq -- that 1441 contained no element of 'automaticity.' American diplomats, meanwhile, claimed that the council had done precisely that. As for the language of the resolution itself, it can accurately be said to lend support to both claims. This is not the hallmark of great legislation.

The UN's members have an obligation under the charter to comply with Security Council decisions. They therefore have a right to expect the council to render its decisions clearly. Shrinking from that task in the face of threats undermines the rule of law."

Christopher Preble, Cato Institute Director of Foreign Policy Studies, stated in the press release issued by the Cato Institute on March 19, 2003 :

"Under the Constitution, the sole legitimate justification for the use of military force is the defense if vital U.S. security interests. This authority is vested jointly in the legislative and executive branches of government. Under international law, leaders are entitled to take military action if they believe that a threat to their nation is imminent.

President Bush believes that Saddam Hussein poses such a threat. The failure to win the support of a majority of the member states on the United Nations Security Council does not necessarily mean that the United States has embarked on an unjust war; it does mean, however, that the evidence presented by the Bush administration was not sufficiently compelling to convince people around the globe that the threat posed by Saddam Hussein's Iraq justifies a preemptive war. History will judge who was right."

Ari Fleischer, former United States White House Press Secretary, stated the following in a press briefing on March 10, 2003 :

"It would derive its legitimacy from, first of all, the legality is of course, as I said, expressed in resolution 678 of the United Nations resolutions. It's also expressed in the Constitution of the United States of America and the President's role as Commander-in-Chief. And of course, also, there is a vote in the Congress on the question of force, in the form of a resolution.

I also is derived from the will of the world to disarm Saddam Hussein, so that security around the world can be preserved. That, itself, derives a moral legitimacy."

[!]

Ms.Sheehan...

The news is out.

http://sisu.typepad.com/sisu/2005/08/she_clearly_doe.html

[okoj]

Been away for awhile. "!" Good facts about 9/11. I think everyone can agree we did a great job taking care of the Taliban in Afghanistan in response. I think people have a real problem with Iraq. Half believe it is part of the war on terror, and half believe it has made things worse (well slightly less than half). You posted some good quotes on the administration's reasons for going to war. I did not see any mention of WMD. Is this correct? WMD was pitched heavily to the american people, and to the UN security council. Given that the american people voted to go to war on false info, should we recognize this fact?

[Michael]

We had to be in Iraq because……

Saddam had to go because he was “indirectly” responsible for 911.
If Saddam did not attack Kuwait, the USA would not have been in Saudi Arabia.
If the USA had not been in Saudi Arabia, OBL would not hate the USA.
IF OBL did not hate the USA, 911 would NOT have happened.

End of story.

PS: Since Ted Kennedy and John Kerry did call this a quagmire and a big mistake; there have been more and more soldiers killed. If they would have backed the President and said the USA was freeing Muslims from a butcher and murderer there would have been less dead soldiers.

[!]

LIGHT A CANDLE.
WE WILL NEVER FORGET !!

http://www.circle-of-light.com/911/911candleI01.html

[okoj]

Mike. I think that was an excellent argument. It is one that would have been worthy enough to bring to the american people for a vote. Unfortunately the administration went the WMD route, because it was more direct even if it was later proven not true. It's like we all know Joran and Depak did someting to Natalee, so instead of finding out what happened, we plant some evidence to get a conviction. What is wrong with planting evidence if it helps to get rid of a known problem? Do my pro Iraqi war friends agree?

[!]

some comments to Ponder.

"The community of nations may see more and more of the very kind of threat Iraq poses now: a rogue state with weapons of mass destruction, ready to use them or provide them to terrorists. If we fail to respond today, Saddam and all those who would follow in his footsteps woill be emboldened tommorrow." - President Bill Clinton 1998

"Saddam's goal...is to achieve the lifting of U.N. sanctions while retaining and enhancing Iraq's weapons of mass destruction programs. We cannot, we must not and we will not let him succeed." - Secretary of State Madeline Albright, 1998
,br> "Iraq is not the only nation in the world to possess weapons of mass destruction, but it is the only nation with a leader who has used them against his own people." - Senator Tom Dashle, 1998

"There is no doubt that...Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear weapons programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of allicit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies." - Senator Bob Graham, December 2001

"Iraq does pose a serious threat to the stability of the Persian Gulf and we should organize an international coalition to eliminate his access to weapons of mass destruction. Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to completely deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power." Former Vice President Al Gore, 2002

"I share this administration's goals in dealing with Iraq and its weapons of mass destruction." - Richard Gephardt, September 2002

"There is no doubt that Saddam Hussein's regime is a serious danger, that he is a tyrant, and that his pursuit of lethal weapons of mass destruction cannot be tolerated. He must be disarmed." - Senator Edward Kennedy, September 2002

"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country." - Fomrer Vice President Al Gore, September 2002 br> "In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including Al Queda members, though there is apparently no evidence in his involvement in the terrible events of September 11, 2001. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons. Should he succeed in that endeavor, he could alter the political and security landscape of the Middle East, which as we know all too well affects American security." Senator Hillary Clinton, October 2002

"I will be voting to give the president of the United States the authority to use force if necessary - to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadlt arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security." Senator John Kerry, October 2003

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retained some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build his chemical and biological warfare capability. intelligence reports also indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons, but has not yet achieved nuclear capability." Senator Robert Byrd, October, 2002

"Saddam Hussein's regime represents a grave threat to America and our allies, including our vital ally, Israel. For more than two decades, Saddam Hussein sought weapons of mass destruction through every available means. We know that he has chemical and biological weapons. He already used them against his neighbors and his own people and is trying to build more. We know that he is doing everything he can to build nuclear weapons, and we know that each day he gets closer to achieving that goal." Senator John Edwards, October 2002

"Iraq made commitments after the Gulf War to completely dismantle all weapons of mass destruction, and unfortunately, Iraq has not lived up to its agreement." - Barbara Boxer, November 2002

"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction." - Bob Graham, December 2002

"Without question we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppresive regime...He presents a particularly grievious threat because he is so consistantly prone to miscalculation. And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction...So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real." - Senator John Kerry, January, 2003

"I am absolutely confident that there are weapons...I saw evidence back in 1998 when we could see the inspectors being barred gaining entry into a warehouse for hours with trucks rolling up and then moving those trucks out." Clinton's Secretary of Defense, William Cohen, April 2003

UN inspectors: Saddam shipped out WMD before war and after

SPECIAL TO WORLD TRIBUNE.COM
Friday, June 11, 2004
The United Nations has determined that Saddam Hussein shipped weapons of mass destruction components as well as medium-range ballistic missiles before, during and after the U.S.-led war against Iraq in 2003.

The UN Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission briefed the Security Council on new findings that could help trace the whereabouts of Saddam's missile and WMD program.

The briefing contained satellite photographs that demonstrated the speed with which Saddam dismantled his missile and WMD sites before and during the war. Council members were shown photographs of a ballistic missile site outside Baghdad in May 2003, and then saw a satellite image of the same location in February 2004, in which facilities had disappeared.

Tuesday, August 26, 2003 : Report: U.S suspects Iraqi WMD in Lebanon's Bekaa Valley

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Baghdad missile site contained a range of WMD and dual-use components, UN officials said. They included missile components, reactor vessel and fermenters – the latter required for the production of chemical and biological warheads.
"It raises the question of what happened to the dual-use equipment, where is it now and what is it being used for," Ewen Buchanan, Perricos's spokesman, said. "You can make all kinds of pharmaceutical and medicinal products with a fermenter. You can also use it to breed anthrax."

The UNMOVIC report said Iraqi missiles were dismantled and exported to such countries as Jordan, the Netherlands and Turkey. In the Dutch city of Rotterdam, an SA-2 surface-to-air missile, one of at least 12, was discovered in a junk yard, replete with UN tags. In Jordan, UN inspectors found 20 SA-2 engines as well as components for solid-fuel for missiles.

"The problem for us is that we don't know what may have passed through these yards and other yards elsewhere," Buchanan said. "We can't really assess the significance and don't know the full extent of activity that could be going on there or with others of Iraq's neighbors."

UN inspectors have assessed that the SA-2 and the short-range Al Samoud surface-to-surface missile were shipped abroad by agents of the Saddam regime. Buchanan said UNMOVIC plans to inspect other sites, including in Turkey.

In April, International Atomic Energy Agency director-general Mohammed El Baradei said material from Iraqi nuclear facilities were being smuggled out of the country.

[okoj]

!-The first part of your post seems to be standard. Most politics bought into the intelligence "product" that they received. Bush stated that to Kerry during the election many times with much success. The results of the intelligence investigation was that it was faulty. What you are showing at the end of your post is that the intelligence WAS correct, and that an independent agency is stating that WMD is being moved out of Iraq. Being an averge joe, it will take me some time to confirm this. Hopefully for our security, the intel community will finally get it right. If there was "mobile" WMD in Iraq, that was to be dismantled and disbused upon invasion, was invasion a good plan of action? In other words we got Sadam, but not the WMD.
PS-That Hillary sounds so Hawkish. Kind of presidental?

[clintcarter]

Michael, if you see this would you please explain what this means:

"PS: Since Ted Kennedy and John Kerry did call this a quagmire and a big mistake; there have been more and more soldiers killed. If they would have backed the President and said the USA was freeing Muslims from a butcher and murderer there would have been less dead soldiers."

Of course if they had backed the President it would have meant that they had good reason to. So it could be said that what's killing those soldiers is that there never Was a good reason to back this war.

But how does encouraging the President to take this course of action led to fewer allied deaths?

Please explain how making this fight bigger (if that is what you mean by support) would have led to fewer deaths.

[!]

LIGHT A CANDLE HERE TO SUPPORT OUR TROOPS.

http://www2.postcards.org/go2/candles?1602732

[okoj]

This thread is coming to an end. Let's pick up where we left off next time.

[!]

This Sheenan women is a space case.

On MSNBC today she was interviewed.

Now we know why she has taken this stand. She is democrat she said and always has been. She said her husbands side are republicans. Now we know the rest of the story. This is all one big political party thing. How sad!!

Now she says we should have gone after ALQUEDA and not even gone to AFGHANASTAN. LOL...

Where the hell does she think Alqueda was at ?

What a stupid damn women!!

Go home Cindy. Get a life, get a clue!!

[okoj]

Now her republican husband is divorcing her! Guess "old boy" could not wait for the Bush vacation to end. So much for "family values."
Cindy is truely an army of one!
She is an american, and she is home.
God bless our families, and god bless america,our land, our home!

[!]

http://www2.postcards.org/go2/candles?1602732

This is a nice place to show your support for our troops.

No more bickering please. Just go and light a candle for all the troops all over the world.

Light one for all the ones that died for our freedoms we enjoy everyday.!